Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[gonetomorrow]

They're not in lockdown in Sweden. Bars, restaurants busy etc. Arrogant sods.

 

[Shevin Keedy]

It depends on the infection rate - if millions of people have had it and the death rate drops from 5-7% to say 0.5-1% whilst still awfully horrific it could be "worse".

Im sure I read in 2018 anywhere from 35,000-80,000 people in the USA alone died of seasonal flu yet no one panicked as it wasnt all over the news 24/7.

Simply put at this stage there is one side that believes the world is coming to an end and another that believes its overblown.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle hence why we need to start seeing widespread testing asap to give us more information on what we are looking at.

I think one of the more simple ways to look at the problem this pandemic poses is that, it could effectively double the rate of people dying taken with all other causes of death. Now that it is not actually too big a deal in terms of dealing with the numbers, but, this would not occur spread out over a year, it would be happening within a couple of months. That is the potential disaster.

 

[Barnfred 55]

I understand your emotions are high right now but just think about what it is you’re arguing for here. Maybe we temporarily make national parks only open for ages 60+.

That came across as a bit patronising. I'm sure that wasn't meant mate so I'll let it go.

But how can you police this? You can’t let only certain people do one thing and not others.

It isn't about emotions. It's about common sense. I'm not talking about opening national parks or anything. I'm talking about allowing people (elderly and the infirmed) to drive short distances to do their walks in wide open spaces. It's not that difficult to police. You simply don't walk up to old farts getting out of cars to ask them what they're doing there.

 

[Nymzee]

Id disagree personally, but id have interest in empowering older people, people with illness and disability in my line of work.

But you enjoy a run, why dont you do that up and down your street instead of going to the park.

By your logic older people are denied the same right as you as they may need to drive there because they are less able to access it then you, is it not the moral thing to do to find a middle ground to empower the more vulnerable and less able, instead of having a blanket rule or a tough luck approach.

Simple have a park ranger at the car park do a person centered assessment and give the most vulnerable a pass into the car park, seems pretty easy to me.

Because my local park is literally about 100m from my house but I could just run up and down my street and just as easily avoid people. Older people don’t need empowering they’re allowed to leave the house to walk; no one is discriminating them by asking people not to drive to national parks for walks. The vulnerable shouldn’t leave the house whatsoever of course.

 

[Nymzee]

That came across as a bit patronising. I'm sure that wasn't meant mate so I'll let it go.

It isn't about emotions. It's about common sense. I'm not talking about opening national parks or anything. I'm talking about allowing people (elderly and the infirmed) to drive short distances to do their walks in wide open spaces. It's not that difficult to police. You simply don't walk up to old farts getting out of cars to ask them what they're doing there.

But that’s creating a job where there wasn’t one. You said you live in a village that’s probably surrounded by wide open spaces to walk in. What makes the national park any different to those? I live next to the Lakes and even I’m not going out there for walks anymore.

 

[Catfish Blues]

I dont get why you're being funny about it tbh - a virus that kills 0.5% of those that come into contact with it is a totally different kettle of fish to one that has the capacity to wipe out 10-15% as simply put thats when you can start talking about an armageddon scenario seen in Hollywood blockbusters.

Simply put experts believe whatever the diagnosed cases are that there are many more infected who we dont know about.

None of us know anything about this thing right now and we wont do until we start getting tests out to the majority of the population.

If it turns out the bulk of the UK have already had it - then simply put the outlook both short an long term is massively more positive than it would be if less than a million have tested positive for antibodies as simply put this would be going on for atleast another year maybe longer imo.

Mate, we're currently seeing ~ 200 deaths a day. I'd be amazed if we don't see that rise to 500 a day in the next week or two. At that rate, you're talking about 15,000 a month.

Over the length of a typical flu season, that'd be 60000 people. In itself, that would swamp the NHS, but when you add the number of people being admitted to hospital for care, including ICU, we'd be looking at a situation which would then effect the ability of the system to care for the number of people who are seriously ill for other reasons.

You can just about cope with that for a short time, but sooner rather than later, doctors and nurses will be so tired they'll start to make mistakes.

This isn't a game, or a film, it's real, and there's not enough slack in the system to cope, so you either let 10's of thousands people die needlessly, or you take an economic hit. Putting party politics to one side, no government would survive overseeing a situation leading to so many obviousably preventable deaths.

 

[Amw79]

Imo if you aint panicking at least 10 times a day you are under-reacting immensely and you should really consider panicking a lot more.

I ain’t panicking (so guess I’m under reacting), but defo have increased stress and anxiety levels.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

They're not in lockdown in Sweden. Bars, restaurants busy etc. Arrogant sods.

Heads to Sweden, FFS! a fiver for a glass of lager! does a U turn.

 

[Goat]

Heads to Sweden, FFS! a fiver for a glass of lager! does a U turn.

 

[Diogenes the Cynic]

People's generosity in times of need.


"A crowdfunder to raise money for personal protective equipment in British hospitals has reached £400,000.

The fundraising effort was launched by a group of NHS doctors and a GP to source PPE “for those who need it the most”. The group originally set a £200,000 target, but this was met in 48 hours.

According to the crowdfunder, actor James McAvoy made a large contribution, with the group behind the fundraiser thanking him for his “extraordinary generosity”.

I've loved James McAvoy ever since I saw him in Shameless.

I also saw him recently on stage in Cyrano de Bergerac where not only was his performance astounding but he gratuitously removed his shirt which happily fueled the erotic enthusiasm of the the person accompanying me.

I really like when celebrities you like turn out to be great people in real life.

 

[larrygobfiend]

I'm not sure - but I get the feeling we're going to find out very soon how many lives the Cheltenham Festival has cost us

The most staggering decision of all of the staggering decisions was to let this go ahead

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

Does a U turn, U turn...a fiver a glass isn't that bad.

 

[BlueToff]

Does a U turn, U turn...a fiver a glass isn't that bad.

What you don't know is mate they're all smokers and are high-risk

 

[Catfish Blues]

They're not in lockdown in Sweden. Bars, restaurants busy etc. Arrogant sods.

Heads to Sweden, FFS! a fiver for a glass of lager! does a U turn.

I'd give it a week before they've started to lockdown, just a matter of time.

 

[Diogenes the Cynic]

My apologies.

I like the poster, I was just doing it for amusement but point taken.

What are you shocked by @Keiran?

I like you. Not like like you.

Unless you want to go to the Superbowl for a game of quazar one Saturday?